Mmmm... I was thinking to try mining with raspberry pi b+ to save electricity, and I don't it is possible now after reading you post above. I think that the reason why I did not see anyone mine burstcoin with raspberry pi yet...

Why don't you try, likr a proof-of-concept....?

It would be quite interesting to know how a raspberry would do, especially as we call BURST "enegy-friendly".

I'm already planning a test I'll keep ya posted.

I bet that it's good for about 2.5TB of optimized Plots in roughly 35-45 seconds. A Beagle Bone Black would be interesting to see also, better RAM and CPU but still that poor little USB 2.0 bottleneck.

I look forward to seeing the resultsGood-Luck

If the USB 2.0 is the main issue, then maybe we can try banana pi with sata port, or maybe look for sata module for raspberry pi...

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

hi dev!!!

can you explain in a few words,how can ensure transaction/blockchain consistency with 1/16 of data?

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

hi dev!!!

can you explain in a few words,how can ensure transaction/blockchain consistency with 1/16 of data?

and then... for the future

we will have this scenario?

1) burst --> POC2) burts2[new coin] -->POC2

or we will have this scenario?

1) only burst with a new implementation from POC --> POC2?

thanks

PoC1 and 2 will be storing different things. PoC1 is storing a bunch of hashes which are used each block, but PoC2 will be storing nonces that meet certain conditions. PoC1 stores 64bytes / scoop / nonce, but for PoC2 only 4 bytes / scoop / nonce is needed since the nonces can be stored as 4 byte differences between them to save space.

PoC2 will be added to burst, and you'll be able to use either. At some point in the future PoC1 might have to be disabled, although that will not happen soon.

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

hi dev!!!

can you explain in a few words,how can ensure transaction/blockchain consistency with 1/16 of data?

and then... for the future

we will have this scenario?

1) burst --> POC2) burts2[new coin] -->POC2

or we will have this scenario?

1) only burst with a new implementation from POC --> POC2?

thanks

PoC1 and 2 will be storing different things. PoC1 is storing a bunch of hashes which are used each block, but PoC2 will be storing nonces that meet certain conditions. PoC1 stores 64bytes / scoop / nonce, but for PoC2 only 4 bytes / scoop / nonce is needed since the nonces can be stored as 4 byte differences between them to save space.

PoC2 will be added to burst, and you'll be able to use either. At some point in the future PoC1 might have to be disabled, although that will not happen soon.

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

So PoC2 will lighten hardware requirements extensively? Will PoC2 require a replot?

Mmmm... I was thinking to try mining with raspberry pi b+ to save electricity, and I don't it is possible now after reading you post above. I think that the reason why I did not see anyone mine burstcoin with raspberry pi yet...

Why don't you try, likr a proof-of-concept....?

It would be quite interesting to know how a raspberry would do, especially as we call BURST "enegy-friendly".

I'm already planning a test I'll keep ya posted.

If crowetic already planned to start the raspberry test, and since I do not have a raspberry on hand yet, then I will wait for your proof-of-concept,

I think that a raspberry pi has to low cpu-capacities for calculating those hashes. Maybe it'll work for <1TB, but not more. You also need a lot of cpu-power for the USB-Port (data transfer).

Mmmm... I was thinking to try mining with raspberry pi b+ to save electricity, and I don't it is possible now after reading you post above. I think that the reason why I did not see anyone mine burstcoin with raspberry pi yet...

Why don't you try, likr a proof-of-concept....?

It would be quite interesting to know how a raspberry would do, especially as we call BURST "enegy-friendly".

I'm already planning a test I'll keep ya posted.

If crowetic already planned to start the raspberry test, and since I do not have a raspberry on hand yet, then I will wait for your proof-of-concept,

I think that a raspberry pi has to low cpu-capacities for calculating those hashes. Maybe it'll work for <1TB, but not more. You also need a lot of cpu-power for the USB-Port (data transfer).

i think raspberry,here is intendend to mine.not to plot files...

to plot file you need high end CPU o a good GPU.i think 280X.but with the latest CPU [i7 haswell] plotter i can see the performance are similar...and more...if you use CPU plotter you can rise stagger size to optimize plot...

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

So PoC2 will lighten hardware requirements extensively? Will PoC2 require a replot?

I imagine it will require a replot, since it entails a different way of storing nonces.You did get it correctly with regards to optimizing and you should optimize your plots. Before I optimized mine you could really hear the drives seeking like mad

Unfortunately I cannot recall now who already did raspberry pi tests in this thread. That member came to the conclusion that it is good for, at most, 8tb. IIRC he did plot on another intel machine.

If I recall correctly, that is uray's online wallet project and is ok.Wait for more confirmations though, just to be on the safe side that I am not misremembering

Wallet Version 1.5.0 ... i wouldn't use that atm, even IF password is safe.

Damn, uray is in the future On a more serious note, I haven't used it and haven't seen uray in a while so it is quite likely that the project is out of date

Sry, Wallet Version 1.1.5 ... fixed it.

My bad mate, it was quite obvious that you mean 1.1.5. Was just some good natured trolling that is all.

Okay , thanks for caring , I recently got aware of BURST and I am actively supporting its rapidly increasing adoption . Uray's Project is a great idea and he should update it as soon as possible , also a cover page on the main domain with a BURST Logo is a must .

URAY is in The Future

I like that .

What are we doing in The Past ?!

The wallet application is full of features most don't know how to use , some could create little tutorials which show step by step how to proceed .

OSX Users could use an easy to install BURST Wallet , too . And what about BURST for Android ?

If I recall correctly, that is uray's online wallet project and is ok.Wait for more confirmations though, just to be on the safe side that I am not misremembering

Wallet Version 1.5.0 ... i wouldn't use that atm, even IF password is safe.

Damn, uray is in the future On a more serious note, I haven't used it and haven't seen uray in a while so it is quite likely that the project is out of date

Sry, Wallet Version 1.1.5 ... fixed it.

My bad mate, it was quite obvious that you mean 1.1.5. Was just some good natured trolling that is all.

Okay , thanks for caring , I recently got aware of BURST and I am actively supporting its rapidly increasing adoption . Uray's Project is a great idea and he should update it as soon as possible , also a cover page on the main domain with a BURST Logo is a must .

URAY is in The Future

I like that .

What are we doing in The Past ?!

The wallet application is full of features most don't know how to use , some could create little tutorials which show step by step how to proceed .

OSX Users could use an easy to install BURST Wallet , too . And what about BURST for Android ?

We would all like for uray to come back, he did great work for BURST and we would like for him to continue to do so.Website is under development, but it will be ready.

Tutorials are a good idea, while some do exist I would like to have a video tutorial for some things up. Unfortunately I am a noob when it comes to video and lack the equipment. If I manage to edumacate myself I might do them myself. Don't hold your breath about it though

As for Android, I imagine a "web wallet" should do fine. I am unsure how easy would it be to adapt the current wallet for it.

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

So PoC2 will lighten hardware requirements extensively? Will PoC2 require a replot?

I imagine it will require a replot, since it entails a different way of storing nonces.You did get it correctly with regards to optimizing and you should optimize your plots. Before I optimized mine you could really hear the drives seeking like mad

Unfortunately I cannot recall now who already did raspberry pi tests in this thread. That member came to the conclusion that it is good for, at most, 8tb. IIRC he did plot on another intel machine.

the banana pi should easily be able to read up to 8tb plots attached to the sata port within blocktime with the dcct miner.my own tests showed me 3tb plots are analyzed within 90 seconds from a 4 port sata multiplier (which was quite tricky to enable in the kernel).the bottleneck is basically the ram bus which can only handle about 500 mb/s.however, with such a setup each tb consumes less than 3 watts (5tb wd red based calc).so you can run a pb with about 200 banana pi, 5 network switches, custom power cables, 200 network cables and a redundant central wallet server. everything together should need about 2500 watts. the costs sum up to about 75000$.the nice thing about this is that it scales in 5tb steps. so you can start today and add each week another 5tb or whatever you want to invest.if you start in large scale you would have to setup a small plotting farm to fill up the drives. a single gpu can plot up to 4 drives a day and if you mod the optimizer to read from one disk and write to another you should get 3 disks a day ready to mine with.

plot read time about 135 seconds.plot files are NOT optimized.I added 32 gb ram total, changed for couple of seconds, or not at all.Also tried with high end A10 cpu best you can buy, still no change. Wasting time and money.Optimizing plots - some real results. readtime went to 15 seconds less. And that was it - best I can do.Now I have complete readout time for 32Tb of 1:55-2:00 minutes per machine.

My conclusion is that SATA controllers are some real bottlenecks (not really too bad, but faster will make real change).

Anything less than this, like using R.Pi or similar leads to nowhere.

Now I am having some real servers with 32Gb ram and dual 6-core opteron CPU-s to test... will post, but I doubt that they will make some great improvements in speed. At least not approved by price of them.

Hmmm maybe I'm not fully understanding this. Looking at the read numbers in Resource Monitor, on the Intel setup, it's reading the drives at about 16Mb/s, there is no way it could finish the entire drive in 106s at that speed. So mining doesn't read the whole drive, just parts of it?

PoC reads 1 4096th of the data each block, or more simply 256MB / TB.

PoC2 will most likely be around 16MB / TB

So PoC2 will lighten hardware requirements extensively? Will PoC2 require a replot?

I imagine it will require a replot, since it entails a different way of storing nonces.You did get it correctly with regards to optimizing and you should optimize your plots. Before I optimized mine you could really hear the drives seeking like mad

Unfortunately I cannot recall now who already did raspberry pi tests in this thread. That member came to the conclusion that it is good for, at most, 8tb. IIRC he did plot on another intel machine.

the banana pi should easily be able to read up to 8tb plots attached to the sata port within blocktime with the dcct miner.my own tests showed me 3tb plots are analyzed within 90 seconds from a 4 port sata multiplier (which was quite tricky to enable in the kernel).the bottleneck is basically the ram bus which can only handle about 500 mb/s.however, with such a setup each tb consumes less than 3 watts (5tb wd red based calc).so you can run a pb with about 200 banana pi, 5 network switches, custom power cables, 200 network cables and a redundant central wallet server. everything together should need about 2500 watts. the costs sum up to about 75000$.the nice thing about this is that it scales in 5tb steps. so you can start today and add each week another 5tb or whatever you want to invest.if you start in large scale you would have to setup a small plotting farm to fill up the drives. a single gpu can plot up to 4 drives a day and if you mod the optimizer to read from one disk and write to another you should get 3 disks a day ready to mine with.

It might be abit costly to get wd red, wondering if wd green is possible

plot read time about 135 seconds.plot files are NOT optimized.I added 32 gb ram total, changed for couple of seconds, or not at all.Also tried with high end A10 cpu best you can buy, still no change. Wasting time and money.Optimizing plots - some real results. readtime went to 15 seconds less. And that was it - best I can do.Now I have complete readout time for 32Tb of 1:55-2:00 minutes per machine.

My conclusion is that SATA controllers are some real bottlenecks (not really too bad, but faster will make real change).

Anything less than this, like using R.Pi or similar leads to nowhere.

Now I am having some real servers with 32Gb ram and dual 6-core opteron CPU-s to test... will post, but I doubt that they will make some great improvements in speed. At least not approved by price of them.

Wow, thanks for your detailed report on lowend AMD computer. Maybe just like xizmax mentioned, Raspberry Pi can only with max 8TB, but just don't know what is the read time... But still, if Raspberry Pi is good for 8TB, then 4 X Raspberry Pi will be better than a lowend AMD computer in power consumption.

plot read time about 135 seconds.plot files are NOT optimized.I added 32 gb ram total, changed for couple of seconds, or not at all.Also tried with high end A10 cpu best you can buy, still no change. Wasting time and money.Optimizing plots - some real results. readtime went to 15 seconds less. And that was it - best I can do.Now I have complete readout time for 32Tb of 1:55-2:00 minutes per machine.

My conclusion is that SATA controllers are some real bottlenecks (not really too bad, but faster will make real change).

Anything less than this, like using R.Pi or similar leads to nowhere.

Now I am having some real servers with 32Gb ram and dual 6-core opteron CPU-s to test... will post, but I doubt that they will make some great improvements in speed. At least not approved by price of them.

Wow, thanks for your detailed report on lowend AMD computer. Maybe just like xizmax mentioned, Raspberry Pi can only with max 8TB, but just don't know what is the read time... But still, if Raspberry Pi is good for 8TB, then 4 X Raspberry Pi will be better than a lowend AMD computer in power consumption.

Complete system with advanced cooling for HDD consumes 120w at the wall, in full hdd working mode. For 32Tb.Think it is too much? Then we will really need some low-end solutions.

Power consumption can be lower, without fans, but will require some more space. I find it very acceptable.Beside, using a Ubuntu is a great advantage for every user demanding more than just "I have the GUI".

Adding additional sata cards and more HDD can expand this system to use less than 200w @wall with 3-4 times more storage.It is just matter of time, I mean time needed for reading plots on all HDD.

The first article has been published on Automated Transactions and Smart Contracts. We did have contact with the reporter but be never asked any questions or had the decency to send the article to us for comments before publishing. We made a few remarks in the comment field below the article, both on that and the content.

The first article has been published on Automated Transactions and Smart Contracts. We did have contact with the reporter but be never asked any questions or had the decency to send the article to us for comments before publishing. We made a few remarks in the comment field below the article, both on that and the content.